Indian Country Today Media Network.com - Indian Self-Determination Acthttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/tags/indian-self-determination-act
enTribal Sovereignty and the Call for Better Oral Healthhttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2015/07/10/tribal-sovereignty-and-call-better-oral-health-160990
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>The idea of “tribal sovereignty” is not static.</p>
</div></div></div>Fri, 10 Jul 2015 18:00:00 +0000kpolisse160990 at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.comhttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2015/07/10/tribal-sovereignty-and-call-better-oral-health-160990#commentsWhat Is Indigenous Self-Determination and When Does it Apply?http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/10/04/what-indigenous-self-determination-and-when-does-it-apply-157123
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Self-determination is an expression often used in discussion of indigenous goals. However, the meaning of self-determination varies among Indigenous Peoples, scholars, international documents, and nation states.</p></div></div></div>Sat, 04 Oct 2014 14:00:00 +0000leeanne157123 at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.comhttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/10/04/what-indigenous-self-determination-and-when-does-it-apply-157123#commentsAuditing Tribal Sovereigntyhttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/08/11/auditing-tribal-sovereignty
<fieldset class="field-group-fieldset group-opinions-body form-wrapper" id="node_opinion_rss_group_opinions_body"><legend><span class="fieldset-legend">Body</span></legend><div class="fieldset-wrapper"><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>In 1977 preeminent Native theorist Vine Deloria, Jr., was asked to write a paper about the current state of Indian affairs in the U.S. Deloria, already famous for his ground-breaking <em>Custer Died for Your Sins</em>, commenced to craft an essay which tackled the most difficult questions that bedeviled Indian Country—issues like federal recognition, membership, Native claims against the US, rejuvenating a land base, etc. His analysis was astonishing for its foresight and simplicity. It is also disheartening to realize that while piecemeal progress has been made on some of these issues they remain as muddled and as complex nearly four decades later. While this column lacks the space to elaborate on the significant benefits that might still accrue if progress could be made on all these subjects, I encourage readers to get a copy of this report and read the no-nonsense rationales behind why Deloria believed these topics warranted attention.</p>
<p>For now I want to focus on to his recommendation that tribes clarify their memberships. This is important because the bona fide constituency of a given indigenous community and just who has the authority to decide who belongs are questions that are currently burning their way through Indian Country with a vengeance.</p>
<p>Deloria’s essay appeared two years after Congress enacted the Indian Self-Determination Act of 1975 which ostensibly was designed to encourage Native peoples to assume a greater role in administering their own affairs rather than relying on federal agencies. And in the last four decades many Natives governments have indeed used the Self-Determination Act and the subsequent Self-Governance Act to exercise political autonomy for the betterment of their communities.</p>
<p>Many tribal nations are involved in examining their membership criteria, some with the legitimate goal of cleaning up the mess that results from identifying citizens based on often cobbled-together records that are usually a combination of oral accounts, personal records, and sketchy federal lists. It is a momentous task that deserves the utmost attention and care. In his description of the history and evolution of tribal membership, Deloria observed, “The present membership of most Indian tribes is a result of fortuitous circumstances, a dash of federal record-keeping, political favors among tribal members, and irrational administrative decisions made by federal employees.”</p>
<p>Unfortunately, there are some instances where it appears this sacred charge may have been, at best, misunderstood and, at worst, misused. Some leaders have even been accused of seizing the opportunity to disenroll members or, as I prefer to call it, dismember their nations for arbitrary, greedy, or political reasons. While the circumstances were different in pre-casino 1977, Deloria called out the same behavior, saying, "The Indian exclusivity stance is very peculiar. …Indians, their eyes on college scholarships, oil royalties, and special privileges, have taken the reverse tack, eliminating peoples unjustly from participation in the affairs of their communities.”</p>
<p>This could be remedied, he then suggested, if each Native community were to prepare an adequately documented roll with the help of qualified scholars. He urged that appropriate federal officials work closely with tribal peoples to help assure that the final rolls accurately “reflect the historical circumstances of each tribal situation” and emphasized that all the necessary federal, tribal, and private records be used to create a careful and accurate membership roll.</p>
<p>While Vine was a visionary, he was also a pragmatist, fully understanding that it would be challenging for all tribes to undertake this process. But, I believe he would have been truly astounded at the methods now being used by numerous tribal nations to decide who is or is not a Native citizen.<br />There is no greater responsibility for a tribal leader than to be a steward of their nation’s citizens/members. Yet in the area of constitutional reform and development, tribal membership, and enrollment policies and practices, many tribal governments have entrusted these most intimate of governmental responsibilities to outside organizations like CSN, Inc. (Constructing Stronger Nations)-DCIAmerica, the Harvard Project for American Indian Economic Development/Native Nations Institute, Automated Election Services, the Falmouth Institute, J. Dalton Institute, and others. In the case of membership, some of these for-profit organizations conduct, what I would suggest, are privacy invading enrollment audits.</p>
<p>These outside audits can be time consuming and expensive. For example, the Falmouth Institute, known for its training programs, recently conducted a nearly eight-year long enrollment audit for the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians at the cost of $900,000. The review of the nearly 14,000 people on the tribe’s roll concluded that more than 10% of the members needed to correct their status and at least 300 listed members appeared to have no direct connection to the 1924 Baker Roll, the tribe’s official foundational enrollment document. Ironically, this roll was conceived as the tribe's final roll when seated in preparation for their formal termination by the U.S. Congress, a process the Cherokees were fortunately able to fend off.</p>
<p>Worst of all, the costs of this outside scrutiny are not limited to money and resources; there is also a debilitating toll exacted on the morale and cohesiveness of the community. The years of uncertain membership status eats away at the very fabric of trust and kinship that define a tribal nation. Leaders who abdicate their responsibilities to auditors may even leave elected office and pass the problem on to the next regime. Over time, there is a real danger that these auditors are the only ones with the long term knowledge of the membership situation—a frightening proposition. No sovereign nation should ever be in such a vulnerable position.</p>
<p>What precisely is an enrollment audit? Why are so many tribes turning to outside corporate and other organizations to investigate internal matters that should rightly be the province of tribal entities? Who are the consultants, lawyers, and accountants who provide advice and counsel to tribal governing officials? Are problems aggravated—either deliberately or through ignorance—by third parties who stand to make more money from a prolonged conflict? And most fundamentally, is reliance on so-called outside “experts” a hallmark of self-determined nations or an indication of ongoing dependency?</p>
<p>These vital questions need deep investigation because Native governments, sovereign entities, are increasingly entrusting key elements of their fundamental powers of governance, membership determination, and constitutional reform to for-profit outside businesses. No matter how well respected, these entities are making money from the strife and confusion we have inherited and now appear to be adding to ourselves. Have our peoples managed to survive centuries of ethnocidal onslaughts only to be stymied in these modern times by flawed records, corporate intrusions, greed, and political infighting?</p>
<p>The very term “audit,” according to Black’s Law Dictionary, means “inspection and verification by IRS of a taxpayers return or other transaction possessing tax consequences.” It also means “systematic inspection of accounting records involving analyses, tests, and confirmation.”<br />But citizenship or membership in a Native nation is, or should be, something much greater, something more meaningful, than an accounting transaction.</p>
<p>While tribal nations, like states and the federal government, have every right to outsource services like transportation, prisons, wastewater treatment, public benefits eligibility services, even law enforcement, such privatizing entails real risks. It frequently raises costs. It does not always mean that the task is done better. It is sometimes a more wasteful approach and, in fact, there is frequently a decline in the quality of services under private contractors. It sometimes leads to corruption and unscrupulous behavior—anyone remember Jack Abramoff and Michael Scanlon?</p>
<p>Deciding who belongs as a bona fide citizen/member of an indigenous nation, we are told, is one of the most fundamental powers of a tribal nation. The difficult burden of creating an accurate tribal roll, as Deloria noted earlier, is an essential step in the maturation of Native nations.</p>
<p>There is more than sufficient knowledge within Indian Country to see that the important task of comprising an authentic and verifiable roll be done without having to resort to paying outside organizations or consultants, even those who identify as being Native or Native-owned. These third-party corporate entities will never have the same core values, historical understanding, or fundamental commitment that a group of competent, rightly empowered, and fully-trained tribal members possess as long as they are armed with the necessary historical data and member-given authority to complete the task.</p>
<p>Tribal citizens must provide this authority by demanding that their leaders develop and employ sensible, transparent policies that offer a realistic pathway to gain or retain citizenship, as well as a fair process to question and appeal decisions. No nation should pit sovereignty against human and civil rights. In Deloria’s words “... continued deprivation of the rights of individual Indians by tribal governments using the shield of tribal sovereignty is much more destructive of Indian communities in the long run than revision of the rolls.”</p>
<p>Let us follow Deloria’s good advice and seek to clarify not deplete our nations’ memberships and let us not continue to engage in the hiring of outside firms for intimate and internal decisions such as membership since many of these businesses are, of necessity, generally more committed to revenue generation than indigenous nation membership clarification.</p>
<p>We cannot consign the re-membering of our nations to anyone other than ourselves. Our private citizenship/membership rolls, with all their complexities, do not exist for profit. Our sovereignty is ours alone to responsibly wield.</p>
<p> </p>
<div><i>David E. Wilkins (Lumbee) holds the McKnight Presidential Professorship in American Indian Studies at the University of Minnesota. His most recent books include The Hank Adams Reader (2011),The Legal Universe (with Vine</i></div>
<div><i>Deloria, Jr.) (2011), and Documents of Native American Political </i><i>Development: 1500s-1933 (2009).</i></div>
<p> </p>
</div></div></div></div></fieldset>
<div class="field field-name-field-short-title field-type-text field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Short title:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Auditing Tribal Sovereignty</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-category field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Category:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/category/finance" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Finance</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/category/government" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Government</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/category/politics" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Politics</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-full-name field-type-text field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Full name:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">David Wilkins</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/david-wilkins" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">David Wilkins</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/vine-deloria-jr" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Vine Deloria Jr.</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/indian-self-determination-act" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Indian Self-Determination Act</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/eastern-band-cherokee-indians" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Eastern Band Of Cherokee Indians</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/irs" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">IRS</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/internal-revenue-service" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Internal Revenue Service</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-author-image field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Author image:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/author/david-wilkins" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">David Wilkins</a></div></div></div>Mon, 11 Aug 2014 18:00:46 +0000mazecyrus156336 at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.comhttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/08/11/auditing-tribal-sovereignty#commentsTribes Must Pull Together to Protect Indian Self-Determinationhttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/05/09/tribes-must-pull-together-protect-indian-self-determination
<fieldset class="field-group-fieldset group-opinions-body form-wrapper" id="node_opinion_rss_group_opinions_body"><legend><span class="fieldset-legend">Body</span></legend><div class="fieldset-wrapper"><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Indian self-determination is the most enlightened Indian policy the United States has ever had. Yet it is still plagued by funding problems and existential issues.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court’s decision in <em>Salazar v. Ramah Navajo Chapter </em>highlighted the precariousness of the entire policy by listing the various ways Congress could change and even abolish it.</p>
<p>The ink was still wet on the Supreme Court’s ruling when the BIA and the IHS proposed a way around it. The <em>Ramah</em> decision rested on a fundamental principle of federal contracting law called the<em> Ferris </em>rule: any federal contractor that performs its end of the contract must be paid in full if the appropriated funds were sufficient to pay that contractor, even if appropriations had all been used for other purposes, unless a specific provision in the contract said otherwise. What did your trustee do?</p>
<p>The Administration proposed to Congress that, for FY 2014, each Tribe or tribal organization with a contract or compact under the Indian Self-Determination Act would be named in the appropriations bill, with an exact dollar amount limiting what it could be paid. By this simple means, the agencies tried to skirt the <em>Ferris </em>Doctrine. Fortunately, Congress rejected this ploy out of hand, largely because of the loud protests from Indian country. But the plan could be revived for future years.</p>
<p>Contract support costs are the engine oil of Indian self-determination. Without enough oil, the machine sputters and eventually stops. Contract support costs enable contractors to pay overhead costs. No organization can function without covering its overhead.</p>
<p>In later years, appropriations for this vital funding element have grown closer to nationwide need, particularly on the BIA side, but there has never been enough and distribution of the appropriated contract support cost funding has often been spotty.</p>
<p>Congress has commanded the BIA and the IHS to come up with a plan for the future, after first consulting with the Tribes.</p>
<p>So what's to be done?</p>
<p>Above all, Congress must reassert the fundamental principle of program parity: Tribes should be free to contract but not be forced to contract and a Tribe’s decision whether to contract should not be influenced by the level of services to its members one way or the other.</p>
<p>In 1970, President Nixon told Congress he would submit a bill to end the dismal Termination Era and replace it with a policy which would reaffirm Federal trust obligations to Indian Tribes while giving them the right to operate their own Federal services by contract.</p>
<p>He emphasized the fundamental principle: The choice to contract or not contract was to be free of worry that levels of program services would be affected by the decision. </p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in;">No tribe would risk economic disadvantage from managing its own programs; under the proposed legislation, <em>locally-administered programs would be funded on equal terms with similar services still administered by Federal authorities. . .</em></p>
<p>Thus, Nixon made PARITY OF PROGRAM DELIVERY the foundational guiding principle of his new policy. But there was a hitch.</p>
<p>Originally, the Indian Self-Determination Act required that the BIA and IHS turn over to the Tribes only the money that they would have spent to operate the same programs. No mention was made of overhead costs. To its credit, the BIA quickly realized that what the BIA and IHS spent would not provide the full amount needed to keep contracted programs in parity with those provided directly by the agencies. It therefore created an administrative budget category called “contract support costs.” In 1978, James McIntyre, the Director of the federal Office of Management and Budget supported the policy. He wrote then-Secretary of the Interior Cyrus B. Andrus:</p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in;">We believe that the Department, through the proper management of its existing resources, can and should provide to the tribal contractors the full amount of contract support costs which are rightly due them. Therefore, we expect that Bureau’s own overhead costs to decrease as the overall level of Self-Determination Act contracting increases</p>
<p>That did not happen. Contract support costs were provided to tribal contractors only by administrative policy and not as a statutory right. Tribes complained that the contract support costs they received were insufficient. In 1988, after 13 years of controversy, Congress made contract support costs a statutory right and gave Tribes the same rights to sue available to other federal contractors. In 1994, Congress beefed up these protections.</p>
<p>But a poison pill had been inserted in 1988. Someone, we don’t know who, planted a proviso into the amendments to the Indian Self-Determination Act just before they hit the floor of Congress. No hearings were held on the proviso. Later, some courts held this proviso trumped everything else in the Act, giving the BIA and IHS the power to withhold payments to contracting Tribes in order to protect services to Tribes that the agencies served directly. This undermined the principal of parity; whenever appropriations were insufficient, the programs run by the agencies would always be better funded than the programs run by Tribes under self-determination contracts. Capped appropriations for contract support costs followed in FY 1994 and so started the war over caps.</p>
<p> It took until 2012 for the courts to sort out the law created by that combination of the ambiguous 1988 proviso and caps on contract support costs appropriations. But Tribes still face the threat that the agencies may once again try to gut the Indian Self-Determination Act.</p>
<p>So now we come to the heart of the problem: the never-ending turf war between the agencies’ infrastructures and Indian Tribes over control of Indian monies, lives, and property.</p>
<p> To justify their existence, these agencies have promoted contract monitoring and micro-oversight to maintain domination. At the same time they have resisted a full accounting of their own budgets. For years they have been telling Congress that contract support costs are too expensive. Yet they have never submitted to a systematic economic and financial evaluation of their own programs. There are savings when programs are contracted out. But they only look at the tribal cost side while maintaining the secrecy of their own in-house budgets and the savings realized when they no longer operate the programs. When the BIA and IHS hand over control of a program to a tribal contractor, their own overhead costs are reduced. What’s more, other federal agencies—for example, the General Services Administration, the Office of Personnel Management, and the Department of Justice—no longer must provide the same level of services to the BIA and the IHS, so their costs are also reduced.</p>
<p>The principle of parity has become obscured by the smog of bureaucratic rhetoric and the intimate familiarity of the BIA and the IHS with the levers of Congress. Despite a significant Supreme Court victory, the self-determination engine continues to wheeze.</p>
<p>Until the turf war between Indian Tribes and the trustee agencies is decisively ended in the Tribes’ favor, the Nixon promise will never be fully realized. The true irony is that Congress is paying for both sides.</p>
<p>Finally Indian country is waking up. In February, the Great Plains Tribal Chairman’s Association called for expedited settlement of past-due contract support claims under the <em>Salazar v. Ramah </em>decision<em>. </em>It asked “the Administration to drop all proposals to sidestep the Ferris rule” and “working together, Interior and HHS and Tribes . . . [to] develop a solution . . . fully and fairly fund(ing) contract support costs by absorbing the costs at the department level rather than looking to BIA and IHS alone.”</p>
<p>And in March, the NCAI urged full funding of contract support costs, with consultation, swifter settlement and supporting parity of opportunity between contracted (and) non-contracted program delivery” and asked “the Administration to dramatically speed up the settlement negotiations with the Ramah Class” and to “develop a rapid and equitable system for resolving past claims brought by individual Tribal contractors of the Indian Health Service.”</p>
<p>Every Tribe and every tribal organization should support these powerful voices. Nearly every Tribe in the Nation has at least one contract or compact under the Indian Self-Determination Act. Tribes that also receive services directly from the BIA or IHS should recognize they are losing an intangible but very basic right – the right to decide whether to exercise greater self-government without risk to basic services. Full funding of contract support costs is the key to freely exercising that option and their submission to agency operation is depriving themselves of its full flower.</p>
<p>Now is the time to organize, unite around the parity principle, protect and extend self-determination and realize the dream of confident, stable self-governments free of the shackles of distant Federal infrastructures whose institutional aim, like all institutions, is first and foremost their own preservation.</p>
<p align="center">*********</p>
<p>Among positive ideas to meet Congress’ call for a permanent solution already circulating among Tribes and their legal counsel are these:</p>
<ol><li>Remove the proviso in 25 U.S. C. § 450j-1(b);</li>
<li>Require an annual accounting by the Indian service agencies of all major categories of their budgets including inherent federal functions; the agencies’ true overhead costs of running direct services to Indian tribes; and the savings to the agencies and to other agencies of the Federal government when services are contracted out to Indian tribes.</li>
<li>Insert a provision allowing tribal contractors and compactors to reimburse their indirect costs at full indirect cost rate levels from all other Federal agencies which they have received, notwithstanding any restrictions in such grants;</li>
<li>Create a separate permanent and indefinite appropriation to cover all contract support costs of Indian Self-Determination contractors; and</li>
<li>Introduce forward funding and two year budgets for all self-determination contracting.</li>
</ol><p>All of these proposals assume that capped appropriations for contract support costs will never reappear and that the agencies’ budgets will be constrained by the annual accountings. Other ideas may be forthcoming as Indian country begins systematic discussion of this issue.</p>
<p><em>Michael P. Gross is an attorney in Santa Fe, New Mexico. He is lead class counsel in the Ramah Class Action. Daniel H. Macmeekin assisted in editing.</em></p>
</div></div></div></div></fieldset>
<div class="field field-name-field-short-title field-type-text field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Short title:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Tribes: Protect Indian Self-Determinatio</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-category field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Category:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/category/government" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Government</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/category/legal" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Legal</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/category/politics" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Politics</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-full-name field-type-text field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Full name:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Michael P. Gross</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/michael-p-gross" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Michael P. Gross</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/salazar-v-ramah-navajo-chapter" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Salazar v. Ramah Navajo Chapter</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/indian-self-determination" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Indian Self-Determination</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/us-supreme-court" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">U.S. Supreme Court</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/us-congress" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">U.S. Congress</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/indian-self-determination-act" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Indian Self-Determination Act</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/richard-nixon" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Richard Nixon</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/bia" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">BIA</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/ihd" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">IHD</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-author-image field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Author image:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/author/ictmn-logo" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">ictmn logo</a></div></div></div>Fri, 09 May 2014 12:00:18 +0000mazecyrus154768 at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.comhttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/05/09/tribes-must-pull-together-protect-indian-self-determination#commentsStory of Forrest Gerard is a ‘must’ for the Canon of Indian Countryhttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/12/30/story-forrest-gerard-must-canon-indian-country-152912
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>What is “The Canon of Indian Country?”</p>
<p>Those stories that are recited in schools, the ones most young people know by heart, tales of valor, excellence and an optimistic future.</p>
<p>We do have great modern stories to tell.</p></div></div></div>Mon, 30 Dec 2013 19:25:25 +0000leeanne152912 at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.comhttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/12/30/story-forrest-gerard-must-canon-indian-country-152912#comments6 Things JFK Did—or Didn’t Do—for Natives Before His Deathhttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/11/22/6-things-jfk-did-or-didnt-do-natives-his-death-152368
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>John F. Kennedy, the 35<sup>th</sup> President of the United States, was assassinated in Dallas, Texas more than 50 years ago.</p></div></div></div>Fri, 22 Nov 2013 14:00:00 +0000leeanne152368 at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.comhttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/11/22/6-things-jfk-did-or-didnt-do-natives-his-death-152368#commentsHonoring Senator Inouye by Working Togetherhttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2012/12/20/honoring-senator-inouye-working-together
<fieldset class="field-group-fieldset group-opinions-body form-wrapper" id="node_opinion_rss_group_opinions_body"><legend><span class="fieldset-legend">Body</span></legend><div class="fieldset-wrapper"><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>The United States, and all of its indigenous peoples, lost a hero and a champion this week, with the passing of U.S. Senator Daniel K. Inouye (D-Hawaii). Senator Inouye’s life was filled with accomplishments, from receiving the Medal of Honor for his bravery on the battlefields of World War II, to rising to become third in line to the presidency. America will remember these achievements and others, but for Native Hawaiians and—I suspect, our American Indian and Alaska Native brothers and sisters—he will be remembered as an unparalleled ally who fought for us, while encouraging us to unite with each other.</p>
<p>Dan Inouye came to Congress knowing the sting of discrimination, having been labeled an “enemy alien” after the attack on Pearl Harbor. He did not grow up in Indian country, but he knew the plight of indigenous people. He was born in Hawaiʻi a few short decades after the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom, raised by a Japanese-American mother who had been adopted by a Native Hawaiian family. I believe that these experiences, coupled with his intellect and his courage, primed him to take on the causes of Native people as if they were his own. </p>
<p>As others have noted, Senator Inouye’s career in Congress corresponded with the rise of the era of Native self-determination. This was not just a coincidence of timing. As he became a stronger and more senior legislator in the Senate and its Indian Affairs Committee, he brought our communities with him. Looking back now, Native Hawaiians know that his rise was our rise, as well as Indian Country’s. The long list of legislative initiatives that he authored, shepherded or influenced include: the Native American Graves and Repatriation Act; the Indian Self-Determination Act; The Indian Health Care Act; the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act; the Indian Child Welfare Act; the Native American Languages Act; and the establishment of the National Museum of the American Indian. Thanks to his advocacy and the work of others, Hawaii’s first people would benefit from the Native Hawaiian Health Care Act and the Native Hawaiian Education Act; both of which further codified the trust relationship between Native Hawaiians and the United States. We saw our people included in legislation that was authored with America’s indigenous people in mind, but that had originally left out Native Hawaiians by oversight. Senator Inouye strived for parity for Native Hawaiians, in the areas of cultural rights, services, and self-determination.</p>
<p>While we try to contemplate a world without Senator Inouye, I am reminded of his recurring insistence that America’s Native peoples “come together” and “speak with one voice.” He wanted us to see ourselves as he saw us, where he advocated for American Indians, Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians alike, rather than simply looking out for his own constituents. He wanted us to work together, and he fought for us all. If we can listen to him now, and follow his example, that could be his greatest legacy. </p>
<p>What better way to honor his life, than for us to commit to continuing his work, together?</p>
<p><em> Kawika Riley is the Washington, D.C. Bureau Chief for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, an independent state agency created by the Hawaii Constitution to serve the Native Hawaiian people. Riley is also on the faculty at the George Washington University, where he teaches for its Native American Political Leadership Program. He is Native Hawaiian.</em><br /> </p>
</div></div></div></div></fieldset>
<div class="field field-name-field-short-title field-type-text field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Short title:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Honoring Sen. Inouye by Working Together</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-category field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Category:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/category/government" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Government</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/category/obituary" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Obituary</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/category/politics" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Politics</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-full-name field-type-text field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Full name:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Kawika Riley</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/kawika-riley" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Kawika Riley</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/daniel-inouye" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Daniel Inouye</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/medal-honor" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Medal of Honor</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/world-war-ii" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">World War II</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/pearl-harbor" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Pearl Harbor</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/native-american-graves-and-repatriation-act" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Native American Graves and Repatriation Act</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/indian-self-determination-act" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Indian Self-Determination Act</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/indian-health-care-act-0" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">The Indian Health Care Act</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/native-american-housing-assistance" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Native American Housing Assistance</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/self-determination-act" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Self-Determination Act</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/indian-child-welfare-act" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Indian Child Welfare Act</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/native-american-languages-act" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Native American Languages Act</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/national-museum-american-indian" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">National Museum of the American Indian</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/native-hawaiian-health-care-act" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Native Hawaiian Health Care Act</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/native-hawaiian-education-act" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Native Hawaiian Education Act</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-author-image field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Author image:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/author/kawika-riley" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Kawika Riley</a></div></div></div>Thu, 20 Dec 2012 12:00:59 +0000mazecyrus146449 at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.comhttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2012/12/20/honoring-senator-inouye-working-together#commentsConflict in the Courts, Tribal Contracts in the Balancehttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2012/06/06/conflict-courts-tribal-contracts-balance
<fieldset class="field-group-fieldset group-opinions-body form-wrapper" id="node_opinion_rss_group_opinions_body"><legend><span class="fieldset-legend">Body</span></legend><div class="fieldset-wrapper"><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Last month the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case testing whether federal contracts with Tribes are really contracts at all. The case involves contracts that the <a title="Bureau of Indian Affairs" href="http://www.bia.gov/" target="_blank">Bureau of Indian Affairs</a> awards tribal governments under the <a title="Indian Self-Determination Act" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Self-Determination_and_Education_Assistance_Act_of_1975" target="_blank">Indian Self-Determination Act</a>, but it also has direct implications for tribal contracts with the <a title="Indian Health Service" href="http://www.ihs.gov/" target="_blank">Indian Health Service</a>. If the government is right, these contracts are not contracts at all. Instead, the government can pay whatever it wants, whenever it wants, even after the Tribes have fully performed their end of the bargain. That outcome would tear down the foundation of the Indian Self-Determination Act, under which Tribes operate one-half of all BIA and IHS operations, and it would relegate Indian Tribes to being second-class contractors.</p>
<p>It wasn’t supposed to be this way.</p>
<p>The Indian Self-Determination Act was rewritten in the 1980s and 1990s precisely to compel the government to award true, binding contracts to Tribes that chose to take over federal operations on their reservations. The agencies were told to calculate the full amount due under each contract, to pay each tribal contractor that amount, and to request supplemental appropriations from Congress if agency funds ran out. After all, that’s what the government does with every other government contractor, and in 1987, Senator Daniel Inouye declared that the past discriminatory treatment suffered by tribal contractors would end with the new statutory language.</p>
<p>But within a few years’ time the agencies were back at it, requesting too few funds to pay all the contracts, never telling contractors how much they would be paid until the contract year was over, yet all the while happily accepting the services that the Tribes were providing. The tribal contractors began to fight back, and in 2005 the Supreme Court ruled for the tribes in the Cherokee case. Then last year in the Ramah case, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver applied that ruling and agreed that all Tribes were entitled to be paid in full, just like any government contractor, and it restored a class action lawsuit against the BIA. But in the meantime, another appellate court in Washington, D.C. disagreed and ruled that the government could not be held responsible, so long as the agency had spent all that it had received from Congress – even though the agency had deliberately refused to ask Congress for sufficient funds to pay the contracts.</p>
<p>In a few weeks the Supreme Court will resolve the conflict between these two appellate decisions. But the case has already forced the government to defend the seemingly indefensible. The government defends agency practices under which the amounts to be paid BIA and IHS contractors are simply set at will by the agencies, then are changed from one day to the next. The government even defends a system that is so poorly managed that on a regular basis, scores of contractors are accidentally overpaid even while other tribes are paid only a fraction of what they are due, and sometimes nothing at all. In essence, the government is asking the Court to bless its incompetence and convert these contracts into discretionary grants that have no payment guarantees at all. It’s also asking the Court to bless a system under which tribes essentially provide the government with extra free services beyond what they are paid for.</p>
<p>The government would never get away with treating Boeing that way, and the Boeings of the world are watching. In a rare alliance with Tribes, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the <a title="National Defense Industrial Association" href="http://www.ndia.org/Pages/Default.aspx" target="_blank">National Defense Industrial Association</a> have stepped in to the case to urge that the Court uphold the Tribes’ contract rights. They point out that well-settled rules are essential to cost-effective government contracting. If the Court upsets those rules, it could undermine the entire government contracting regime, forcing out some contractors who cannot afford to run the risk not getting paid, while increasing the cost of services from those contractors who continue doing business.</p>
<p>A decision in the case is expected before the Court’s current term ends in June.</p>
<p><em>Lloyd Miller is a tribal rights attorney with the Sonosky Chambers firm. He argued the Cherokee case in 2005, and is on the legal teams handling the Ramah and Arctic cases.</em></p>
</div></div></div></div></fieldset>
<div class="field field-name-field-short-title field-type-text field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Short title:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Conflict in the Cour</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-category field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Category:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/category/all" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">All</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/category/government" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Government</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/category/health" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Health</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/category/land" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Land</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/category/politics" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Politics</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-full-name field-type-text field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Full name:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Lloyd Miller</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/indian-health-service" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Indian Health Service</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/daniel-inouye" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Daniel Inouye</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/bureau-indian-affairs" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Bureau of Indian Affairs</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/us-supreme-court" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">U.S. Supreme Court</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/indian-self-determination-act" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Indian Self-Determination Act</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/national-defense-industrial-association" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">National Defense Industrial Association</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/lloyd-miller" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Lloyd Miller</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-author-image field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Author image:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/author/lloyd-miller" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Lloyd Miller</a></div></div></div>Wed, 06 Jun 2012 15:00:53 +0000mazecyrus116481 at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.comhttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2012/06/06/conflict-courts-tribal-contracts-balance#commentsTribal Programs Win in Appeals Rulinghttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2011/05/11/tribal-programs-win-appeals-ruling-33304
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Tribes operating services formerly run by the federal government should finally have their program administrative costs paid, following 17 years in which Congress capped funding for that purpose, a three-judge panel of the U.S.</p></div></div></div>Wed, 11 May 2011 21:00:16 +0000kpolisse33304 at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.comhttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2011/05/11/tribal-programs-win-appeals-ruling-33304#comments